Deceased Was Murdered By Someone Else: Allahabad High Court Acquits Accused In 1982 Murder Case

The Allahabad High Court has acquitted accused persons in a 1982 murder case, saying that the deceased was murdered by someone else.

The Court was hearing Criminal Appeals arising from a common Judgment of conviction and sentence passed by the Trial Court.

A Division Bench comprising Justice J.J. Munir and Justice Sanjiv Kumar held, “It is clear from the above discussion that it was a blind murder and the deceased was murdered by someone else, in the dark hours of night, away from the abadi of the village.”

The Bench said that the prosecution has not produced any other independent witness, who were allegedly present at the place of occurrence.

Advocates P.K. Singh, Manoj Kumar Patel, and Divyanshu Nandan Tripathi appeared on behalf of the Appellants/Accused, while AGA Ghan Shayam Kumar appeared on behalf of the Respondent/State.

Brief Facts

In July 1982, the informant filed a written information before the police, saying that he was a labourer. His brother (deceased) used to guard the crop of bhata (brinjal) sown near the south-west bank of the canal located in village Bhadri. As usual, he went there to guard the crop and at about 1:00 a.m., in the wee hours, the informant's uncle came over to him and told him that near the railway station, some people were beating his brother and threatening him to work for them, instead of working for the assailants’ opponents. Thereupon, he along with his uncle and cousin reached the vicinity of the railway station and heard some noise that was coming from the west of the railway line. They reached there and saw that the accused persons including the Appellants were allegedly battering the deceased, kicking and punching him, besides thrashing him with sticks (danda) in an agricultural field. The informant and his uncle touched the assailants’ feet and imploringly asked them why they were beating the poor man so much.

One of the accused said that since he works as a labourer for their opponents but not for them, they would insert lathi in his rectum. Thereafter, two accused allegedly pulled him down and inserted a lathi in his rectum. The informant’s brother died in agony at the spot and during the occurrence, a number of persons from the village reached there, who also requested the Appellants not to beat the deceased. The Appellants left the scene of crime upon seeing the informant’s brother dead and threatening him that if he lodged an FIR with the Police, he too would be killed. Subsequently, an FIR was registered and all the Appellants were convicted under Sections 302, 147, and 149 of the Indian Penal Code, 1860 (IPC). They were sentenced to undergo life imprisonment for life. Being aggrieved by the Trial Court’s decision, they approached the High Court.

Reasoning

The High Court in view of the facts and circumstances of the case, observed, “In view of above discussion, we find that P.W.1 Ram Kishor and P.W.2 Pancham had not seen the incident and their testimony is not reliable and trustworthy. There are major contradictions in ocular and medical evidence.”

The Court reiterated that when the evidence of eye-witnesses raises serious doubts about their presence at the time of occurrence, the unexplained omission to examine the independent witness would assume significance.

“According to the prosecution, there were many eye-witnesses and villagers at the spot when the incident occurred. The presence of eye-witnesses, at the place of occurrence, is highly doubtful. The prosecution has not explained why other eye-witnesses were not examined. This aspect of the matter assumes significance and gives rise to an adverse inference against the prosecution”, it added.

The Court noted that the prosecution has utterly failed to prove its case beyond reasonable doubt and the Trial Judge has not appreciated the evidence on record in the right perspective and reached a wrong conclusion regarding the Appellants’ guilt upon conjectures and improper appreciation of evidence.

“In view of the foregoing discussions, we are of opinion that both these appeals deserve to be allowed and the conviction and sentence of the appellants set aside”, it concluded.

Accordingly, the High Court allowed the Appeals and acquitted the accused persons.

Cause Title- Lala and Another v. State (Neutral Citation: 2025:AHC:228192-DB)

Appearance:

Appellants: Advocates P.K. Singh, Manoj Kumar Patel, Divyanshu Nandan Tripathi, G.S. Tiwari, Bholeshwar, and Harsh Kumar Sharma.

Respondent: AGA Ghan Shayam Kumar

Click here to read/download the Judgment